Restoring Tallgrass Prairie Species Mixtures on Leafy Spurge-Infested Rangeland

Masters, Robert A.; Beran, Daniel D.; Gaussoin, Roch E.

doi:10.2307/4003104

Cited by 26 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is concern that seeding practices and competition from seeded species may greatly reduce biomass of naturally occurring native populations (Cox and Anderson 2004). However, seeding cannot greatly reduce resident native biomass when it is already very low, as was the case in our study and similar studies (Masters et al 2001, Rose et al 2001). Yet, native biomass reductions of even the small magnitudes we observed could be concerning in cases where the natives are rare, threatened, or endangered (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

“…A portion of sown seeds often germinate and survive the brief monitoring periods typical of (re)introduction studies in invaded grasslands (i.e., 1-3 years; e.g., Lym and Tober 1997, Mangold et al 2007, Sheley 2007. But sizes of individual plants and plant populations (i.e., individuals per plot) often remain small over the brief monitoring periods (e.g., Masters et al 2001, Mangold et al 2007, Davies 2010, and the small populations are sensitive to demographic stochasticity and disturbances such as herbivory and drought (Moles andWestoby 2004, Armstrong andSeddon 2008). To meet ecological and land use goals, the small, scattered plants must eventually form large populations capable of persisting without intensive, ongoing human intervention (Griffith et al 1989).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long‐term population dynamics of seeded plants in invaded grasslands

Rinella

Mangold²,

Espeland

et al. 2012

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, dozens of studies have involved attempts to introduce native and desirable nonnative plant species into grasslands dominated by invasive weeds. The newly introduced plants have proved capable of establishing, but because they are rarely monitored for more than four years, it is unknown if they have a high likelihood of persisting and suppressing invaders for the long-term. Beyond invaded grasslands, this lack of long-term monitoring is a general problem plaguing efforts to reintroduce a range of taxa into a range of ecosystems. We introduced species from seed and then periodically measured plant abundances for nine years at one site and 15 years at a second site. To our knowledge, our 15-year data are the longest to date from a seeding experiment in invaded, never-cultivated grassland. At one site, three seeded grasses maintained high densities for three or more years, but then all or nearly all individuals died. At the second site, one grass performed similarly, but two other grasses proliferated and at least one greatly suppressed the dominant invader (Centaurea maculosa). In one study, our point estimate suggests that the seeded grass Thinopyrum intermedium reduced C. maculosa biomass by 93% 15 years after seeding. In some cases, data from three and fewer years after seeding falsely suggested that seeded species were capable of persisting within the invaded grassland. In other cases, data from as late as nine years after seeding falsely suggested seeded populations would not become large enough to suppress the invader. These results show that seeded species sometimes persist and suppress invaders for long periods, but short-term data cannot predict if, when, or where this will occur. Because short-term data are not predictive of long-term seeded species performances, additional long-term data are needed to identify effective practices, traits, and species for revegetating invaded grasslands.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long‐term population dynamics of seeded plants in invaded grasslands

Rinella

Mangold²,

Espeland

et al. 2012

Ecological Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In particular invasion of rough fescue grassland communities within the aspen parkland and foothills natural regions of Alberta has been identified. Research directed toward reversing this invasion using prescribed burning and chemical control has been conducted within Parks and Natural Areas (Anderson 1994; Masters et al 2001).…”

Section: Ecological Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs and threats of invasive species to Alberta's natural resources /

McClay¹,

Alberta.²

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

House sparrow. Passer domesticus L. European starling, Stumus vulgaris L. Feral dogs, Canis familiaris L. Norway and Black or Roof Rat, Rattus norvegicus (Berkkenhaut) and Rattus rattus L. Mountain pine beetle, Dendroctonus ponderosae (Hopkins) Seven-spotted lady beetle, Coccinella septempunctata L. Brown trout, Salmo trutta L. Brook trout, Salvelinus fontinalis (Mitchill) Cutthroat trout (Yellowstone), Oncorhynchus clarki bouvieri (Bendire) Rainbow Trout, Oncor/iync/ius mykiss (Walbaum) White pine blister rust, Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch. West Nile Virus Brucellosis, Brucella abortus (Schmidt) Bovine tuberculosis, Mycobacterium bovis Karlson and Lessel The following sections provide some details on these major invaders. 4.1, Terrestrial plants-non-agronomics 4.1.1. Canada thistle STATUS AND DISTRIBUTION Canada thistle is widespread and often abundant throughout the province. In the Land and Forest Division surveys from 1999 to 2002 it was especially common in SRD corporate areas SW2,3,4, NEl, and NWl (Figure 1). HABITAT Canada thistle occurs along roads and pipelines, on well sites, grazing leases, cut blocks, and recreation areas in the forested areas of Alberta. It frequently occurs along lakeshores and creek banks. It is also a common weed of pastures, cultivated land, wastelands, and urban areas throughout the province, although it is less common in dryer areas and in the south. ECONOMIC IMPACT Canada thistle is one of the major agricultural weeds of the prairies, causing significant yield losses and management problems in a wide variety of crops. It is also common and often abundant in pastures, particularly on moister soils. Recent studies have show that it reduces forage yield of pastures by up to 2 kg for every kg of thistle biomass (C.

show abstract

“…Herbicide and revegetation Wilson and Kachman 1999 Euphorbia esula L. Herbicide and biocontrol Nelson et al 1998Tillage, herbicide, and revegetation Selleck et al 1962, Ferrell et al 1998Lym and Tober 1997Tillage, herbicide, and fertilization Lym and Messersmith 1993Grazing and herbicide Lym et al 1997Herbicide, burning, and revegetation Masters and Nissen 1998, Masters et al 2001 Hypericum perforatum L.…”

Section: Invasive Plant Strategy Components Citationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principles and Practices for Managing Rangeland Invasive Plants

Masters¹,

Sheley²

2001

Journal of Range Management

Self Cite

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive plants reduce the capacity of ecosystems to provide goods and services required by society, alter ecological processes, and can displace desirable species. They can reduce wildlife habitat quality, riparian area integrity, rangeland economic value, and enterprise net returns. The invasion process is regulated by characteristics of the invading plant and the community being invaded. The presence and spread of invasive plants is often symptomatic of underlying management problems that must be corrected before acceptable, long-term rangeland improvement can be achieved. Disturbance appears to be important early in the invasion process because it creates vacant niches that alien plants can occupy. Control of invasive plants may only open niches for establishment of other undesirable plants unless desirable plants are present to fill the vacated niches. In many instances, rangelands have deteriorated to the point that desirable species are either not present, or in such low abundance that plant community recovery is slow or will not occur without revegetation after invasive plants are controlled. Integrated weed management employs the planned, sequential use of multiple tactics (e.g. chemical, biological, cultural, and mechanical control measures) to improve ecosystem function (energy flow and nutrient cycling) and maintain invasive plant damage below economic levels, and emphasizes managing rangeland ecosystem functions to meet objectives rather than emphasizing a particular weed or control method. Sustainable, integrated invasive plant management strategies require assessing plant impacts, understanding and managing the processes influencing invasion, knowledge of invasive plant biology and ecology, and are based on ecological principles. Invasive plant management programs must be compatible with and integrated into overall rangeland resource management objectives and plans. Because of the complexity of managing invasive plants, it is imperative that relevant ecological and economic information be synthesized into user-friendly decision support systems.

show abstract

Restoring Tallgrass Prairie Species Mixtures on Leafy Spurge-Infested Rangeland

Abstract: "Restoring tallgrass prairie species mixtures on leafy spurge-infested rangeland" (2001). Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty. 1080.

Cited by 26 publications

References 28 publications

Long‐term population dynamics of seeded plants in invaded grasslands

Long‐term population dynamics of seeded plants in invaded grasslands

Costs and threats of invasive species to Alberta's natural resources /

Principles and Practices for Managing Rangeland Invasive Plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About